English Only: The wrong kind of immigration reform

Updated: 03/22/10 9:13pm
  Email this article  |      Share on Delicious  Share on Digg
Tools

Possibly Related
BezekIan

America needs immigration reform. Many people from all sides of the political sphere agree on this.

But sadly, many calling for immigration reform have errantly linked the reasonable goal of immigration reform with the absurd desire to make English the exclusive language of our nation.

While at first it seems logical to force immigrants to exclusively use our language, the ramifications of “English Only” policies end up causing far more harm than good. Movements to further enshrine English as our only language, like the H.R. 1228 currently under consideration by our nation’s Congress, will be counterproductive.

The idea behind the English Only movement is that English is the dominant language of our nation, our founding documents were written in English and the majority of our culture and traditions are based in English. As such, proponents claim we should make our governments, national and local, deal only in English to ensure that its supremacy remains unchallenged and that immigrants quickly learn English.

US-English.org, a leading proponent of declaring English as our nation’s exclusive language, says, “Official English unites Americans, who speak more than 322 languages, by providing a common means of communication; it encourages immigrants to learn English in order to use government services and participate in the democratic process; and it defines a much-needed common sense language policy.”

That all sounds reasonable. Encouraging immigrants to learn English sounds like a nice idea, but what really happens if an immigrant isn’t yet fluent? Many of those government services are essential to everyone, regardless of whether they speak English.

Should a person calling 911 be denied access to emergency services because they don’t perfectly grasp English? Should a wife be denied the ability to take part in the health decisions of her critically ill husband because she can’t fully understand the doctors at an English Only government-run hospital? Should parents be unable to talk to their children’s teachers because the school is not allowed to hire translators?

People who speak only one language often assume that people are only capable of being totally fluent or completely ignorant of a language. They fail to realize that there is a long and difficult intermediate stage in the language-learning process, where you are able to understand and speak enough to get by without yet achieving fluency.

Those of you who have studied a foreign language at a fairly high level understand that while you could probably conduct business in that second language, you would prefer to deal in your native tongue, and the odds of making mistakes on a crucial government document would be much higher were you denied access to English. Personally, I can order food and ask for directions in Spanish, but I couldn’t, if forced to, do my taxes in it.

The people we are denying these government services to are, in fact, learning and want to be fluent in English. They just aren’t there yet.
The sorts of services the English Only movement seeks to deny non-fluent English speakers access includes health services, social welfare programs, ballots and driver’s license tests.

This also harms those of us who are fluent in English.

Simple question: Would you rather have an immigrant on the road who passed a driver’s test written in Spanish or an immigrant who has no license at all? Our society as a whole becomes less safe if a substantial portion of our population is unable to communicate with the government in a language it understands.

In Colorado, we amended our state Constitution to make English the state’s only official language in 1988. Nationally, legislators are trying to pass H.R. 1228, which would override President Clinton’s executive order that provides services to people with “limited English proficiency.”

If a major wave of immigrants were coming here who truly didn’t want to learn English, the English Only movement would have a case for passing more of these laws. But recent census data indicates that 98 percent of Latino immigrants felt that it was “essential” that their children understand English “perfectly.”

Clearly English will remain our nation’s dominant tongue for the foreseeable future. Why should we discriminate against immigrants who are still learning English and embitter them toward our language?

The English Only movement is a poisonous non-solution to our flawed immigration system.

Editorials Editor Ian Bezek is a senior economics major. His column appears Mondays in the Collegian. Letters and feedback can be sent to letters@collegian.com.

Published March 21, 2010 in Opinion

10 comments

Brittanicus

March 21, 2010 at 10:15 PM
Flag this comment

An Amnesty for illegal immigrants, will do several things that will cost a trillion dollars more for American taxpayers.
1. The illegal immigration rush to the border will never be stopped.
2 Millions more will be ready to run the US Border Patrol gauntlet, before the final act is signed.
3. It means literary Family unification, so those already here will be able to bring in their immediate family members. That means a rough calculation three extra people, could mean another 100 million people, adding to at the least 20 to 30 million already settled here.
4. People will be waiting expectantly for a third AMNESTY.
5.Millions more pregnant females from all across the world, will try and sneak into America before the baby is born. This means that the whole family can move in, which is another extra people to the welfare lines.
6. The Border states already overrun with illegal immigrants, wont have to wait for another earthquake? It will be sinking under the behemoth volume of foreign nationals pouring into the financially floundering state. Therefore it will become a third world cesspool.
7 The highways will become deathtraps—not that they are not already.
8. Our depreciating infrastructure will decline even more, as there will be even less money to pay for it.
9. Welfare rolls will soar to a unsustainable heights.
10. E-Verify, 287 G, Ice Raids, No Match Letter (Real ID Act & Save Act) would become obsolete.
11. Spanish will become the predominant language in border states.
12. Violence on a massive scale across the country, that could lead to unrest and riots.
13 Could even lead to a Second Civil War?
14. The only way to justify another AMNESTY is a nationwide referendum. LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE.

ONE FLAG-ONE LANGUAGE-ONE NATION.


maryJ

March 22, 2010 at 12:14 AM
Flag this comment

There is nothing “poisonous” about wanting to preserve our country’s language. All other nations have that right, including Mexico and 20 other Spanish-speaking countries. None of those countries are deemed “racist” just because they prefer to remain Spanish-speaking.

Perhaps Mr. Bezek would care to talk to the thousands of American citizens, many of them law-abiding taxpayers who have paid taxes for 10, 20, or 30 years, who are losing their jobs because they don’t speak Spanish. These include honest and hardworking schoolteachers, firefighters, social workers, policemen, etc. who now face real hardship simply because we have a “government” that prefers to protect the interests of foreign lawbreakers over the interests of American citizens.

Read more …

I personally do not care whether someone who came here illegally can drive on our road or use our government services. They shouldn’t be here in the first place.


Mzee

March 22, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Flag this comment

“History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages or cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however it is a curse for a society to be bilingual.” Dick Lamm


find it

March 22, 2010 at 12:14 PM
Flag this comment

Find me the second generation Hispanic immigrants that cannot speak English. I’ll wait.


Registered Independent

March 22, 2010 at 2:41 PM
Flag this comment

This is primarily a money issue, Mr. Bezek. You managed to write your article from the perspective that money for public services grows on trees. But money doesn’t grow on trees. All of it comes out of the taxpayer’s pockets.

It is not the taxpayer’s job to pick up the tab for translating virtually every document into other languages. Nor to provide taxpayer-funded translators, who are quite expensive, for every conceivable situation.

Read more …

This present generation of immigrants is already the luckiest such generation we have ever had. Because virtually every city hosts ESL (English as a Second Language) classes, where immigrants may learn English for free. All they have to do is sign up, and show up to class.

None of our earlier great waves of immigrants ever had this free public service at their disposal. And yet all of the earlier immigrants learned to make their way and learn English themselves, and get along just fine in this country. Tens of millions of earlier immigrants all accomplished this.

And there is absolutely no reason that the present generation of immigrants should be any different. And absolutely no reason that they should cost the taxpayer’s one dime more than their millions of predecessors cost us.

In addition to the enormous cost to taxpayers, is the perhaps equally important fact that translating everything into immigrant’s native tongues removes their incentive to learn English as quickly and thoroughly as they can. That is a huge error. Did you learn nothing from the story of the Tower of Babel?

We’re not running a baby sitting service here. We are trying to run a nation of 350 million people, all from differing cultural backgrounds. We did not hand-hold any previous generation of immigrants, and there is no reason whatsoever that we need to treat just this present generation of immigrants as if they were little children who needed to be led along by the hand.


Thomas Anderson

March 22, 2010 at 4:23 PM
Flag this comment

Bezek’s got it right, very nice writing.

maryJ: “I personally do not care whether someone who came here illegally can drive on our road or use our government services. They shouldn’t be here in the first place. “

Read more …

I dare you to make less sense, maryJ. How does the phrase go, better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt?

As for the laughable, xenophobic Brittanicus, how’s being on the front line of the white power struggle going lately?


Bell

March 22, 2010 at 7:29 PM
Flag this comment

Nice column.

It is not about racism, or nationalism, it is about depriving people of governmental services. If you pay your taxes you are entitled to these services whether or not you can speak English.

Read more …

English Only is foolish, aimed at a certain population and not at the problem at hand.


MaryJ

March 23, 2010 at 9:45 AM
Flag this comment

I dare you to make less sense, maryJ. How does the phrase go, better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt?

Do you have any substantive comments to add besides insults, Mr. Bell?

Why should a bankrupt country pay to provide welfare services, in their own language yet, to millions of foreign lawbreakers? Why should native-born, law-abiding, taxpaying American citizens lose their jobs because they don’t speak the language of these millions of foreign lawbreakers?

Read more …

Do you pay taxes yourself, Mr. Bell, or are you just a snot-nosed college student, living off the taxpayer’s teat, who thinks he knows it all? Do you have a mortgage — do you have kids to support?

Perhaps it is better that we taxpaying responsible citizens just allow this country to go down in bankrupt flames, just to teach snot-nosed know-it-alls like you how hard it was to build it up in the first place. You seem to think this country just magically appeared in all its First World, developed glory, courtesy of Harry Potter’s magic wand.

Well, it didn’t. It took generations of blood, sweat, toil and tears and yes, lots and lots of tax dollars collected from “fools” like me and my parents and grandparents.

I’ll be thinking about you, Mr. Bell, when I sign my tax forms on April 15.


MaryJ

March 23, 2010 at 9:47 AM
Flag this comment

Sorry, the post above was aimed at “Thomas Anderson”, not Mr. Bell.


FYI

March 23, 2010 at 10:06 AM
Flag this comment

I hope you realize that many of the services you mentioned are privileges, regardless of whether you speak English or not.

 

Comments are closed for this item.

Powered by Detroit Softworks